Apart from Richard's original statement, which I think parses to be the
opposite of intent, I think we're all agreeing...
Richard's original statement was:
To be clear, it's the *Internet* Service Provider, not the *Voice*
Service Provider, which may or may not be there.
That statement actually says that the ISP may or may not be there. I
don't think anybody actually thinks an Internet emergency call can be
made without some access to the Internet... :-)
Cheers,
Martin
________________________________
From: Rosen, Brian [mailto:Brian.Rosen at neustar.biz]
Sent: Tuesday, 24 March 2009 1:36 PM
To: rbarnes at bbn.com; Dawson, Martin
Cc: ecrit at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Proposal to add "applicability" statementto
-framework/-phonebcp
No.
The ISP requirements are unwaivering.
[[MCD]] "requirements are unwaivering" = "it has requirements" in my
book. So I think we're saying the same thing.
The VSP requirements change. The VSP, not the ISP adds location and
route, not the ISP.
[[MCD]] "requirements change" = "may not be there" by the same token.
The device may query the LIS and LoST and send the INVITE directly to
the PSAP URI... so, yes, the ISP doesn't do it but nor is it necessary
for some VSP to do it. I think that's what we're all saying.
Brian
------Original Message------
From: Richard Barnes
To: Dawson, Martin
Cc: Brian Rosen
Cc: ECRIT
Sent: Mar 23, 2009 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Proposal to add "applicability" statementto
-framework/-phonebcp
That's what I meant:
-- ISP plays a role in Framework (i.e., it has requirements)
-- VSP does not (no requirements - may not be there)
Dawson, Martin wrote:
Isn't that the other way around? The VSP may or may not be there?
-----Original Message-----
From: ecrit-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ecrit-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Richard Barnes
Sent: Tuesday, 24 March 2009 10:56 AM
To: Rosen, Brian
Cc: ECRIT
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Proposal to add "applicability" statementto
-framework/-phonebcp
To be clear, it's the *Internet* Service Provider, not the *Voice*
Service Provider, which may or may not be there.
In summary, s/IP access network/Internet Service Provider/
Rosen, Brian wrote:
Nah, it's not the access network (AN) it's the calling service
provider
(SP) that is affected. The examples are adding location (who adds
the
Geolocation header) and the LoST query. Both of those would be done
by
the SIP calling network in, for example, an IMS system.
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Barnes [mailto:rbarnes at bbn.com]
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 7:27 PM
To: Rosen, Brian
Cc: ECRIT
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Proposal to add "applicability" statement to
-framework/-phonebcp
Editorial changes:
This document describes an architecture for emergency calling in the
typical Internet environment, in which the calling device bears most
of
------Original Message Truncated------
--------------------------
Brian Rosen
NeuStar
(724) 382-1051
brian.rosen at neustar.biz